IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i10p1061-d81083.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conservation Measures and Loss of Ecosystem Services: A Study Concerning the Sardinian Natura 2000 Network

Author

Listed:
  • Federica Leone

    (Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile, Ambientale e Architettura, University of Cagliari, Cagliari 09123, Italy)

  • Corrado Zoppi

    (Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile, Ambientale e Architettura, University of Cagliari, Cagliari 09123, Italy)

Abstract

The seeming dichotomy between the protection of biodiversity and the supply of ecosystem services (ESs) represents an outstanding field of research that requires a structured and detailed analysis. The paper analyzes and discusses the role of ESs within spatial planning and strategic environmental assessment (SEA) procedures through the content analysis methodology and a logical framework (LF) implemented into the SEA of municipal masterplans (MMPs). We discuss the role of ESs as factors that improve the effectiveness of SEA-based processes related to management plans (MPs) of sites that belong to the Sardinian Natura 2000 Network with reference to their positive impacts on environmental quality. The empirical outcomes put in evidence the inconsistencies between MMPs and MPs in terms of sustainability-oriented objectives and potential losses of the ESs productive output due to measures adopted by the MPs in order to protect habitats and species. The scant attention paid to ESs in the operational context of MMPs, MPs and SEA reports, particularly as regards their regulative framework, entails that the issue of the protection of ESs has to be carefully taken into account within the process of the definition and establishment of MPs through an SEA report that integrates the MPs and MMPs LFs.

Suggested Citation

  • Federica Leone & Corrado Zoppi, 2016. "Conservation Measures and Loss of Ecosystem Services: A Study Concerning the Sardinian Natura 2000 Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:10:p:1061-:d:81083
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/10/1061/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/10/1061/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    2. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    3. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & de Groot, Rudolf & Lomas, Pedro L. & Montes, Carlos, 2010. "The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1209-1218, April.
    4. R. Turner & G. Daily, 2008. "The Ecosystem Services Framework and Natural Capital Conservation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(1), pages 25-35, January.
    5. repec:bla:econom:v:62:y:1995:i:246:p:247-67 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Palmquist, Raymond B, 1984. "Estimating the Demand for the Characteristics of Housing," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 66(3), pages 394-404, August.
    7. Schirpke, Uta & Scolozzi, Rocco & De Marco, Claudio & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2014. "Mapping beneficiaries of ecosystem services flows from Natura 2000 sites," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 170-179.
    8. Siti Nuryanah & Sardar M. N. Islam, 2015. "The Context of the Case Study," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Corporate Governance and Financial Management, chapter 5, pages 145-156, Palgrave Macmillan.
    9. Kassarjian, Harold H, 1977. "Content Analysis in Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 4(1), pages 8-18, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Schmidt, Katja & Martín-López, Berta & Phillips, Peter M. & Julius, Eike & Makan, Neville & Walz, Ariane, 2019. "Key landscape features in the provision of ecosystem services: Insights for management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 353-366.
    2. Federica Leone & Corrado Zoppi, 2019. "Local Development and Protection of Nature in Coastal Zones: A Planning Study for the Sulcis Area (Sardinia, Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-21, September.
    3. Corrado Zoppi, 2018. "Integration of Conservation Measures Concerning Natura 2000 Sites into Marine Protected Areas Regulations: A Study Related to Sardinia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-18, September.
    4. Francesco Scorza & Angela Pilogallo & Lucia Saganeiti & Beniamino Murgante, 2020. "Natura 2000 Areas and Sites of National Interest (SNI): Measuring (un)Integration between Naturalness Preservation and Environmental Remediation Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-16, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Spangenberg, Joachim H. & von Haaren, Christina & Settele, Josef, 2014. "The ecosystem service cascade: Further developing the metaphor. Integrating societal processes to accommodate social processes and planning, and the case of bioenergy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 22-32.
    2. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    3. Zilio, Mariana I. & Alfonso, M. Belén & Ferrelli, Federico & Perillo, Gerardo M.E. & Piccolo, M. Cintia, 2017. "Ecosystem services provision, tourism and climate variability in shallow lakes: The case of La Salada, Buenos Aires, Argentina," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 208-217.
    4. Steger, Cara & Hirsch, Shana & Evers, Cody & Branoff, Benjamin & Petrova, Maria & Nielsen-Pincus, Max & Wardropper, Chloe & van Riper, Carena J., 2018. "Ecosystem Services as Boundary Objects for Transdisciplinary Collaboration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 153-160.
    5. Kubiszewski, Ida & Concollato, Luke & Costanza, Robert & Stern, David I., 2023. "Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    6. Sagie, Hila & Orenstein, Daniel E., 2022. "Benefits of Stakeholder integration in an ecosystem services assessment of Mount Carmel Biosphere Reserve, Israel," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    7. Pleasant, Mary M. & Gray, Steven A. & Lepczyk, Christopher & Fernandes, Anthea & Hunter, Nathan & Ford, Derek, 2014. "Managing cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 141-147.
    8. Danley, Brian & Widmark, Camilla, 2016. "Evaluating conceptual definitions of ecosystem services and their implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 132-138.
    9. Hermelingmeier, Verena & Nicholas, Kimberly A., 2017. "Identifying Five Different Perspectives on the Ecosystem Services Concept Using Q Methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 255-265.
    10. Masiero, Mauro & Franceschinis, Cristiano & Mattea, Stefania & Thiene, Mara & Pettenella, Davide & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2018. "Ecosystem services’ values and improved revenue collection for regional protected areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 136-153.
    11. Acharya, Ram Prasad & Maraseni, Tek & Cockfield, Geoff, 2019. "Global trend of forest ecosystem services valuation – An analysis of publications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    12. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2014. "Ecosystem services assessment: A review under an ecological-economic and systems perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 289(C), pages 124-132.
    13. Primmer, Eeva & Furman, Eeva, 2024. "How have measuring, mapping and valuation enhanced governance of ecosystem services?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    14. Juan Tang & Yudi Fang & Ziyan Tian & Yinghua Gong & Liang Yuan, 2022. "Ecosystem Services Research in Green Sustainable Science and Technology Field: Trends, Issues, and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-22, December.
    15. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Stapleton, L.M. & Hanna, P. & Ravenscroft, N. & Church, A., 2014. "A flexible ecosystem services proto-typology based on public opinion," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 83-90.
    17. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    18. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    19. McVittie, Alistair & Norton, Lisa & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Siameti, Ioanna & Glenk, Klaus & Aalders, Inge, 2015. "Operationalizing an ecosystem services-based approach using Bayesian Belief Networks: An application to riparian buffer strips," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 15-27.
    20. Brown, Melanie G. & Quinn, John E., 2018. "Zoning does not improve the availability of ecosystem services in urban watersheds. A case study from Upstate South Carolina, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 254-265.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:10:p:1061-:d:81083. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.